Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 21:32:48 +0200 From: Marco Molteni <molter@tin.it> To: Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Removing T/TCP and replacing it with something simpler Message-ID: <20041021213248.223cab2c.molter@tin.it> In-Reply-To: <4177E25E.804639E@freebsd.org> References: <4177C8AD.6060706@freebsd.org> <20041021153933.GK13756@empiric.icir.org> <4177E25E.804639E@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org> wrote:
> Bruce M Simpson wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 21, 2004 at 04:33:17PM +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> > > Thus after the removal of T/TCP for the reasons above I want to
> > > provide a work-alike replacement for T/TCP's functionality:
> >
> > I disagree. I think the time spent here would be better spent on
> > working on an import of SCTP into the kernel, perhaps the KAME code
> > base would be a good starting point.
>
> Is the SCTP in KAME complete and stable? Are there any other (open
> source) implementations of it?
SCTP in KAME is complete, stable and fully supported.
It is mainly developed by the SCTP RFC author, Randall Stewart.
A T/TCP alternative as you are describing sounds very
similar to PR-SCTP (Partial Reliability SCTP). (Don't let the
name fool you, please read the internet draft).
There is at least another kernel-level open source implementation,
for Linux, plus other user-level implementations.
marco
--
panic("The moon has moved again.");
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041021213248.223cab2c.molter>